On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 16:21, Clint Popetz <clint(a)42lines.net> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Ove Ranheim <oranheim(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> What is it specifically that you will benefit from taking this into
> Wicket? What plans do you have and what would be to the better?
> Please enlighten me, but what's the problem for "the resource you're
> trying to convince" of not contributing under the Seam umbrella. Why is it a
> problem for the wicket team to stay in sync with releases? Isn't it approx a
> year between every Wicket release?
The idea is that if wicket 1.x is released, wicket-cdi 1.x will be released
simultaneously. In addition, as wicket evolves, the person most familiar
with its evolution (Igor) will have responsibility for keeping the
integration current. Finally, wicket already supports other dependency
injection frameworks (spring, juice) as wicket modules, so it makes sense
for the cdi module to live alongside those, and will give cdi more exposure
for those looking to use dependency injection in wicket.
Yep. As I mentioned, there are other JBoss projects that are going this
route as well:
This integrations are still embraced by Seam, and may rely on Seam common
modules (i.e., solder and conversations), but the benefit is that the
integrations are kept inline with the release of the project.
We are still fleshing out the logistics of how these modules will get worked
back into Seam distributions, something we may discuss at the face-to-face.
This doesn't apply to all Seam modules, because either the module is
enhancing a spec (Seam Faces, Seam Mail), using a project more than
integrating into it (Seam International, Seam Cron), or the integrated
project just doesn't have interest or initiative yet. The relationships will
likely evolve over time.
Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597